Quick poll regarding "scenario design" topic

[ROC]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

This is more in line with the "A" old style that Brooke incorrectly tried to define. 

[SEseph]

Lets go with ROC's version of old style. Good, it's settled, let's move on!

[puller]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

This

[Spikes]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

+1.

[Easyscor]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

This is better, almost there and it needs item 3) modified.
3) Engage the side COs and X0s for comment. Make any adjustments agreed to by the designer and the COs on behalf of their command staff as needed.

Finally, two more to make it read as follows:
1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Engage the side COs and X0s for comment. Make any adjustments agreed to by the designer and the COs on behalf of their command staff as needed.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration to the public.
5) Once the rules are agreed by the COs at step 3 there will be no changes.
6) Side COs are responsible for addressing any of their side's concerns. (They have accepted the write-up and rules as amended.)

If this became a reality, I would likely participate in scenarios again.

[Vudu15]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

This...

[waystin2]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

+1

[perdue3]

The only thing wrong with Nef's suggestion is that you still release it to the public and follow that with "No changes will be made." What if someone has a valid point or idea that the private members did not think of? A design of any kind (FSO, Scenario, Snapshot, etc.) should never be released to public with the words, "No changes will be made." As Devil said, public makes it completely transparent. So long as changes can still be made once it hits the public forum, I have no issue with it at all.

Either way, it does not really matter. With as many good minds as we have here, we can get it close enough to pass. 

[FLOOB]

What Nefarious said. A

[FBDragon]

IMO I would love to be more involved with scenarios now so I'd pick C. I at least would like to put my 2 cents worth in!!! 

[Dace]

As I've recommended already when I was still a CM.

1) Come up with a design or completed writeup.
2) Share amongst CM team and privately amongst community members who you would personally like input from like Guppy, Devil, and others.
3) Make any adjustments you feel might be needed through thier input.
4) Share write up publicly and open registration for public.

I never understood the voting and design by community aspect. If you want help from someone knowledgeable ask them directly. Don't bog yourself down with negativity.

This.

[Krusty]

Mostly B. It's not perfect but it's better than talking to a brick wall. Here's how it was in past FSOs, scenarios, and anything:

1) The setup is announced and is final. You can't make suggestions until next time. We're not taking suggestions for next time until we discuss it. We won't tell you when we're discussing it. We've made our decisions. The setup is announced and final.

That didn't work. It was a bad system with no input or feedback.

B is definitely better, though if the concern is over it becoming a vocal minority platform or a quagmire of dissent, here's how you fix that: Announce the setup. Have 1 week of comments. Take the top 3 comments and JUST those comments can lead to discussion and compromise or change on the design.

Example: The planeset would be one discussion (as in this case). The scoring would be another (say, in a DGS type of setup how bomber player %s tie into scoring, etc), or map setup/layout and fields, distances covered, fleet positions, the geographical logistics might be another.

Limit the conversation but allow players input and discussion. Then put a 2-3 week limit on those 3 discussions in total, and after that a decision is made by the CMs taking those topics into consideration and a FINAL write-up is issued. That keeps it from becoming a festering process and keeps people on-track and focused to an issue, rather than being combatitive or difficult for the sake of being heard.

I think B with a slight change to keep it a shorter discussion is better.

[perdue3]

Mostly B. It's not perfect but it's better than talking to a brick wall. Here's how it was in past FSOs, scenarios, and anything:

1) The setup is announced and is final. You can't make suggestions until next time. We're not taking suggestions for next time until we discuss it. We won't tell you when we're discussing it. We've made our decisions. The setup is announced and final.

That didn't work. It was a bad system with no input or feedback.

B is definitely better, though if the concern is over it becoming a vocal minority platform or a quagmire of dissent, here's how you fix that: Announce the setup. Have 1 week of comments. Take the top 3 comments and JUST those comments can lead to discussion and compromise or change on the design.

Example: The planeset would be one discussion (as in this case). The scoring would be another (say, in a DGS type of setup how bomber player %s tie into scoring, etc), or map setup/layout and fields, distances covered, fleet positions, the geographical logistics might be another.

Limit the conversation but allow players input and discussion. Then put a 2-3 week limit on those 3 discussions in total, and after that a decision is made by the CMs taking those topics into consideration and a FINAL write-up is issued. That keeps it from becoming a festering process and keeps people on-track and focused to an issue, rather than being combatitive or difficult for the sake of being heard.

I think B with a slight change to keep it a shorter discussion is better.

I agree. Releasing to public along with "no changes will be made" should be avoided. If there is a private forum with upstanding community members hashing out details, that is great. But, if it goes from there to the public with the words "no changes will be made," nothing has been solved. It would make for a shorter discussion, I feel, considering the brainpower that was hopefully involved in the private discussion. However, the event is for the public and while it will never meet everyone's satisfaction, it should be the goal of the designers to have it meet most people's satisfaction. In that regard, I feel that Brooke has done well with this scenario.

[4440]

Having been gone from the game close to 7 years now, my opinion on this wont carry much weight. Option C would be preferable, seeing that many scenarios don't see a 2nd go around.

Other wise I would opt for A but open a discussion after the event to address what some may see as shortcomings to it.

Those who design these can never make everyone happy, heck alot of them end up with the wrong side coming out on top. Not the designs fault, but the skillsets of the pilots can skew the best intentions.

I CO'd 2 of these, read and reread the rules and and such, and both times I could find holes that were neither allowed or disallowed. As the CO, I would have hated having a hole that benefited me plugged.

If the discussion were to take place prior to CO's being selected, and possibly using Krusty's suggestion of limiting the field of potential "fixes" or "desires" Then C would be my first choice.

<S>4440

[Spikes]

<S>4440

Good to see you man, hope all is well!